Section 19.35(3)(a) provides that
the feecharged for reproduction of public
recordsmay not exceed the "actual, necessary
anddirect cost . . unless a fee is
otherwisespecifically established . . .
by law."

The sales tax imposed by Section
77.52is not part of the fee for furnishingcopies of records.

Thus, the charge of the sales tax
in additionto the actual cost of furnishing
copiescannot be excessive within the
meaning ofSection 19.37(4), which provides
a penaltyfor charging excessive fees for
furnishingcopies of public records.

You also ask whether a charge made
by apublic custodian for a search forrecords would be subject toWisconsin's sales tax law.

Since I find no provision for taxing
chargesmade in connection with these searches,
itis my opinion that any fee charged
for suchsearch is not subject to a sales
tax.

The same reasoning applies to certificationsof copies of public records.

Fees for certifying would not be
subject tothe sales tax but fees for providing
thecertified copy would be.

If the record custodian does not
charge a feefor the provision of copies of
records, asales tax cannot be imposed because
there isa failure of consideration requisite
underSection 77.51(4)(h).

Thus, when the custodian waives
the feefor reproduction, the sales tax,in effect, is waived.

But the record custodian may not
waivethe sales tax if a fee is chargedfor reproduction.

While the current law dictates the
conclusionthat fees charged for furnishing
copies ofpublic records are subject to sales
tax, Ifind it somewhat anomalous that
members ofthe public must pay tax on fees
forproviding copies of records whichare already public property.

I therefore am recommending to theLegislature that the law be changed
to exemptthe furnishing of copies of public
recordsfrom the imposition of Wisconsin's
sales tax.